The table above shows the
maximum deviation allowable in the fundamental constants in order to get a
universe capable of supporting life. In some instances, changing the
constants more than the amount indicated results in a universe that
doesn't even contain matter. In many other instances, only hydrogen or
light elements would exist (making life impossible). Changing the last two
parameters changes the longevity of the universe. Many of these
perturbations would result in the universe that would have ended billions
of years ago.

That the
universe seems to be designed specifically for human life has been called
the anthropic principle. Depending upon their philosophical outlook,
scientists hold to either the "weak" or "strong"
anthropic principle. The weak anthropic principle states that the apparent
design of the universe is an illusion, and that there must be some
undiscovered underlying principle that explains why the universe seems to
be designed. The strong anthropic principle states that the underlying
reason that the universe appears to be designed is because it has been
designed by the ultimate Intelligent Designer - God. How do we determine
which version of the anthropic principle is correct? The standard way to
test any theory is to gather data and see which version fits the data
better. So far, the strong anthropic principle fits the data better. For
example, the last physical constant mentioned in the table above was not
discovered until a few years ago, and it is, by far, the most constrained
constant discovered to date. Initial observations suggested that the value
is the closest value to zero (within 1 part in 10120) known in
the universe. Subsequent observations suggest that it may be closer to 1
part in 10240. The degree of fine tuning has led some
scientists to make the statement:

"This type of universe, however, seems to require a degree of fine
tuning of the initial conditions that is in apparent conflict with 'common
wisdom'."1